Define the objective and reference condition
Selection begins with a specific operating question: which condition should change, and which indicator will show the result. The reference period should record throughput, feed, mill settings, consumption, and events that could affect the comparison.
Without a comparable baseline, a change in consumption or performance cannot responsibly be attributed to the grinding media.
- Agreed objective and indicator
- Comparable period and conditions
Characterize the ore, feed, and process stage
Hardness alone does not define the alternative. Using the available evidence, the evaluation should consider abrasivity, impact, ore variability, feed and product size, grinding stage, and equipment constraints.
When a measurement is missing, state the gap and turn it into a testing requirement rather than replacing it with an assumption.
Compare material, size, and operating conditions
Material, manufacturing route, size, and charge distribution should be compared as a system. A technical sheet helps rule out incompatibilities and frame questions, but it does not replace an application review.
Product fields marked Confirm with Engineering should remain outside the decision until the source or evidence gap is resolved.
Validate the alternative through a controlled trial
The trial should define scope, duration, conditions to hold or record, and success criteria. Interpret the result alongside process stability rather than as an isolated number.
- Trial owner and dates
- Measurement method and closure criterion